CONFLICT OF LAWS (2020) CASE DIGEST ATTY.

WALDEMAR GRAVADOR
EH401

Alice Van Dorn v. Hon. Romillo and Richard

Upton Whether the complaint should be dismissed due to
G.R. No. L-68470, October 8, 1985 the effect of foreign divorce on the parties?

FACTS: RULING:

Petitioner Alice Reyes Van Dorn (Alice) is a citizen Yes, the court ruled in favor of Alice.
of the Philippines while private respondent
Richard Upton (Richard) is a citizen of the United It is true that owing to the nationality principle
States. They were married in Hongkong. After the embodied in Article 15 of the Civil Code, Philippine
marriage, they established their residence in the nationals are covered by the policy against
Philippines that they begot two children. absolute divorces the same being considered
Eventually, the parties divorced in Nevada, United contrary to our concept of public policy and
States on the ground of incompatibility in morality. However, aliens may obtain divorces
understanding. Then, Alice has re-married also in abroad, which may be recognized in the
Nevada, this time to Theodore Van Dorn. Philippines, provided they are valid according to
their national law. In this case, the divorce in
Richard filed suit against petitioner in Civil Case Nevada released private respondent from the
stating that Alice’s business in Ermita, Manila, (the marriage from the standards of American law,
Galleon Shop) is conjugal property of the parties, under which divorce dissolves the marriage.
and asking that Alice be ordered to render an
accounting of that business, and that Richard be Thus, pursuant to his national law, Richard is no
declared with right to manage the conjugal longer the husband of Alice. He would have no
property. standing to sue in the case as petitioner's
husband entitled to exercise control over conjugal
Alice moved to dismiss the case on the ground that assets. As he is bound by the Decision of his own
the cause of action is barred by previous country's Court, which validly exercised
judgment in the divorce proceedings before the jurisdiction over him, and whose decision he does
Nevada Court wherein respondent had not repudiate, he is estopped by his own
acknowledged that he and petitioner had "no representation before said Court from asserting his
community property.” right over the alleged conjugal property.

The RTC denied the Motion to Dismiss on the To maintain, as private respondent does, that,
ground that the property involved is located in the under our laws, petitioner has to be considered still
Philippines so that the Divorce Decree has no married to private respondent and still subject to a
bearing in the case. wife's obligations under Article 109, et. seq. of the
Civil Code cannot be just. Alice should not be
Alice’s Arguments: obliged to live together with, observe respect and
fidelity, and render support to Richard. The latter
1. Richard is estopped from laying claim on should not continue to be one of her heirs with
the alleged conjugal property because of the possible rights to conjugal property. She should not
representation he made in the divorce be discriminated against in her own country if the
proceedings before the American Court that ends of justice are to be served.
they had no community of property.
2. The Galleon Shop was not established Note: Alice initiated the divorce in Nevada.
through conjugal funds; and that Richard's
claim is barred by prior judgment. Pilapil v. Judge Ibay-Somera
G.R. No. 80116, June 30, 1989
Richard’s Contention:
FACTS:
The divorce is not valid and binding in this
jurisdiction, the same being contrary to local law Petitioner Imelda Manalaysay Pilapil, a Filipino
and public policy. citizen, and private respondent Erich Ekkehard
Geiling, a German national, were married before
Issue: the Registrar of Births, Marriages and Deaths at

Estanuts by BEANIZA|CADELEÑA|ESTAVILLA|MELENDEZ|SABUSAY UNIVERSITY OF SAN CARLOS

Read the Full Text
CONFLICT OF LAWS (2020) CASE DIGEST ATTY. WALDEMAR GRAVADOR
EH401

Friedensweiler in the Federal Republic of Germany.

The couple lived together for some time in Malate, NO. The law specifically provides that in
Manila where their only child, Isabella Pilapil prosecutions for adultery and concubinage the
Geiling, was born on April 20, 1980. person who can legally file the complaint should be
the offended spouse, and nobody else. Corollary to
Thereafter, marital discord set in followed by a such exclusive grant of power to the offended
separation de facto between them. After about spouse to institute the action, it necessarily follows
three and a half years of marriage, Geiling initiated that such initiator must have the status, capacity or
a divorce proceeding against Pilapil in Germany legal representation to do so at the time of the filing
before the Schoneberg Local Court in January 1983. of the criminal action.
He claimed that there was failure of their marriage In the present case, the fact that Geiling obtained a
and that they had been living apart since April valid divorce in his country, the Federal Republic of
1982. Germany, is admitted. Said divorce and its legal
effects may be recognized in the Philippines insofar
On January 15, 1986, Division 20 of the Schoneberg as Geiling is concerned in view of the nationality
Local Court, Federal Republic of Germany, principle in our civil law on the matter of status of
promulgated a decree of divorce on the ground of persons.
failure of marriage of the spouses. The custody of
the child was granted to Pilapil Under the same considerations and rationale,
Geiling, being no longer the husband of Pilapil, had
The records show that under German law said no legal standing to commence the adultery case
court was locally and internationally competent for under the imposture that he was the offended
the divorce proceeding and that the dissolution of spouse at the time he filed suit
said marriage was legally founded on and
authorized by the applicable law of that foreign The allegation of Geiling that he could not have
jurisdiction. brought this case before the decree of divorce for
lack of knowledge, even if true, is of no legal
On June 27, 1986, or more than five months after significance or consequence in this case. When said
the issuance of the divorce decree, Geiling filed two Geiling initiated the divorce proceeding, he
complaints for adultery before the City Fiscal of obviously knew that there would no longer be a
Manila alleging that, while still married to said family nor marriage vows to protect once a
Geiling, Pilapil "had an affair with a certain William dissolution of the marriage is decreed. Neither
Chia as early as 1982 and with yet another man would there be a danger of introducing spurious
named Jesus Chua sometime in 1983". The heirs into the family, which is said to be one of the
complaints were filed accordingly. reasons for the particular formulation of our law on
adultery.
Pilapil filed this special civil action for certiorari
and prohibition seeking the annulment of the order OTHER DISCUSSIONS:
of the lower court denying her motion to quash.
The petition is anchored on the main ground that American jurisprudence, on cases involving
the court is without jurisdiction "to try and decide statutes in that jurisdiction which are in pari
the charge of adultery, which is a private offense materia with ours, yields the rule that after a
that cannot be prosecuted de officio (sic), since the divorce has been decreed, the innocent spouse no
purported complainant, a foreigner, does not longer has the right to institute proceedings
qualify as an offended spouse having obtained a against the offenders where the statute provides
final divorce decree under his national law prior to that the innocent spouse shall have the exclusive
his filing the criminal complaint." right to institute a prosecution for adultery

ISSUE: United States vs. Mata cannot be successfully relied

upon by private respondent. In applying Article
Whether or not respondent Geiling can prosecute 433 of the old Penal Code, substantially the same as
petitioner Pilapil for adultery after the issuance of Article 333 of the Revised Penal Code, which
the divorce in Germany punished adultery "although the marriage be
afterwards declared void", the Court merely stated
RULING: that "the lawmakers intended to declare

Estanuts by BEANIZA|CADELEÑA|ESTAVILLA|MELENDEZ|SABUSAY UNIVERSITY OF SAN CARLOS

Read the Full Text
CONFLICT OF LAWS (2020) CASE DIGEST ATTY. WALDEMAR GRAVADOR
EH401

adulterous the infidelity of a married woman to her

marital vows, even though it should be made to Whether or not the divorce decree rendered by the
appear that she is entitled to have her marriage Japanese Court, which was applied by Manalo is
contract declared null and void, until and unless valid and recognized here in the Philippines.
she actually secures a formal judicial declaration to
that effect" RULING:

Republic vs. Manalo YES.

G.R. No. 221029, April 24, 2018
Article 26, paragraph 2 of the Family Code only
Super landmark na case. Nindot ni siya e full text requires that there be a divorce validly obtained
actually per kindda lengthy. abroad

FACTS: Art. 26. All marriages solemnized outside the

Philippines, in accordance with the laws in force in
Marelyn Manalo, filed a petition for cancellation of the country where they were solemnized, and valid
entry of marriage, by virtue of a judgment of there as such, shall also be valid in this country,
divorce rendered by a Japanese court. Manalo was except those prohibited under Articles 35 (1), (4), (5)
married to Yoshino Minoro, a case for divorce was and (6), 3637 and 38. (17a)
filed by her in Japan and a divorce decree was
rendered by the Japanese Court. Where a marriage between a Filipino citizen and
a foreigner is validly celebrated and a divorce is
At present, they are no longer living together. She thereafter validly obtained abroad by the alien
filed a petition to cancel their entry of marriage in spouse capacitating him or her to remarry, the
order that it would not appear anymore that Filipino spouse shall have capacity to remarry
petitioner is still married to the said Japanese under Philippine law.
national who is no longer her husband or is no
longer married to her; furthermore, in the event Based on a clear and plain reading of the provision,
that petitioner decides to be remarried, she shall it only requires that there be a divorce validly
not be bothered and disturbed by said entry of obtained abroad. The law does not require that the
marriage, and she be allowed to use her maiden alien spouse should be the one to initiate the
surname, MANALO. divorce. It does not distinguish whether the
Filipino spouse is the petitioner or the respondent.
RULING OF THE TRIAL COURT: The court is bound by the words of the statute;
neither can the courts put words in the mouth of
The trial court denied the petition, and ruled that the lawmakers. The legislature is presumed to
the divorce obtained abroad should not be know the meaning of the words, to have used
recognized, as Art. 15 of the New Civil Code, does words advisedly, and to have expressed its intent
not afford Filipinos the right to file for a divorce, by the use of such words as are found in the statute.
unless they are naturalized as citizens of another Verba legis non est recedendum, or from the words
country. of a statute there should be no departure.

RULING OF THE COURT OF APPEALS: The subject provision should not make any
distinction.
The Court of Appeals overturned the decision, and
held that Art. 26 of the Family Code is applicable The purpose of the provision is to avoid the absurd
even if it was Manalo who initiated the divorce situation where the Filipino spouse remains
against her Japanese husband. It ruled that the married to an alien spouse, who after a foreign
meaning of the law should be based on the intent of decree that is effective in the country where it was
the lawmakers and in view of the legislative intent married, is no longer married. It is a corrective
behind Article 26, it would be the height of injustice measure to address an anomaly where the Filipino
to consider Manalo as still married to the Japanese spouse is tied to the marriage while the foreign
national, who, in turn, is no longer married to her. spouse is free to marry under the laws of his or her
country.
ISSUE:

Estanuts by BEANIZA|CADELEÑA|ESTAVILLA|MELENDEZ|SABUSAY UNIVERSITY OF SAN CARLOS

Read the Full Text
CONFLICT OF LAWS (2020) CASE DIGEST ATTY. WALDEMAR GRAVADOR
EH401

A Filipino who initiated a foreign divorce he or she should be governed with whatever law he
proceeding is in the same place and in like or she chooses.
circumstance as a Filipino who is at the receiving
end of an alien initiated proceeding. Whether the Manalo must still prove the Japanese law allowing
Filipino spouse initiated the foreign divorce divorce
proceeding or not, a favorable decree dissolving
the marriage bond and capacitating his or her alien Jurisprudence has set guidelines before Philippine
spouse to remarry will have the same result: the courts recognize a foreign judgment relating to the
Filipino spouse will effectively be without a status of a marriage where one of the parties is a
husband or wife. citizen of a foreign country. Presentation solely of
the divorce decree will not suffice. The fact of
There is no real and substantial difference between divorce must still first be proven. A divorce
a Filipino who initiated a foreign divorce obtained abroad is proven by the divorce decree
proceedings and a Filipino who obtained a divorce itself. Indeed the best evidence of a judgment is the
decree upon the instance of the alien spouse. judgment itself. The decree purports to be a written
act or record of an act of an official body or tribunal
The provision violates one of the essential of a foreign country.
requisites of the equal protection clause.
Particularly, the limitation of the provision only to Under Sections 24 and 25 of Rule 132, on the other
a foreign divorce decree initiated by the alien hand, a writing or document may be proven as a
spouse is unreasonable as it is based on superficial, public or official record of a foreign country by
arbitrary, and whimsical classification. Blind either:
adherence to the nationality principle must be
disallowed if it would cause unjust discrimination (1) An official publication or
and oppression to certain classes of individuals (2) A copy thereof attested by the officer
whose rights are equally protected by law. having legal custody of the document. If
the record is not kept in the Philippines,
There is no real and substantial difference between such copy must be:
a Filipino who initiated a foreign divorce
proceedings and a Filipino who obtained a divorce (a) Accompanied by a certificate
decree upon the instance of his or her alien spouse. issued by the proper diplomatic
In the eyes of the Philippine and foreign laws, both or consular officer in the
are considered as Filipinos who have the same Philippine foreign service
rights and obligations in an alien land. stationed in the foreign country in
which the record is kept and
The circumstances surrounding them are alike.
Were it not for Paragraph 2 of Article 26, both are (b) Authenticated by the seal of
still married to their foreigner spouses who are no his office.
longer their wives/husbands. Hence, to make a
distinction between them based merely on the Presented by Manalo in the courts, were:
superficial difference of whether they initiated the
divorce proceedings or not is utterly unfair. Indeed, 1) Decision of the Japanese Court
the treatment gives undue favor to one and allowing the divorce;
unjustly discriminate against the other.
2) The Authentication/Certificate
Further, the differentiation in Paragraph 2 of issued by the Philippine
Article 26 is arbitrary. There is inequality in Consulate General in Osaka, Japan
treatment because a foreign divorce decree that of the Decree of Divorce; and
was initiated and obtained by a Filipino citizen
against his or her alien spouse would not be 3) Acceptance of Certificate of
recognized even if based on grounds similar to Divorce by Petitioner and the
Articles 35, 36, 37 and 38 of the Family Code. In Japanese national.
filing for divorce based on these grounds, the
Filipino spouse cannot be accused of invoking Even if the divorce decree was not denied by the
foreign law at whim, tantamount to insisting that OSG. It is well-settled in our jurisdiction that our

Estanuts by BEANIZA|CADELEÑA|ESTAVILLA|MELENDEZ|SABUSAY UNIVERSITY OF SAN CARLOS

Read the Full Text
CONFLICT OF LAWS (2020) CASE DIGEST ATTY. WALDEMAR GRAVADOR
EH401

courts cannot take judicial notice of foreign laws. by pure lust or profit. The court also took judicial
Since the divorce was raised by Manalo, the burden notice of the fact that Filipinos are relatively more
of proving the pertinent Japanese law validating it, forbearing and conservative in nature and that
as well as her former husband's capacity to they are more often the victims or at the losing end
remarry, fall squarely upon her. Japanese laws on of mixed marriages. Finally, it is not for the court to
persons and family relations are not among those prejudge the motive behind a Filipino's decision to
matters that Filipino judges are supposed to know marry an alien national. @anisah
by reason of their judicial function.
Any attempt to regulate their lifestyle would go
Cases was remanded for Manalo to prove the said into the realm of their right to privacy and would
Japanese Law. raise serious constitutional questions. Love,
though the ideal consideration in a marriage
Pwede na mo mo stop here! contract, is not the only valid cause for marriage.
Other considerations, not precluded by law, may
Additional points raised: validly support a marriage.

The 1987 Constitution expresses that marriage, as Separation of the Church and State
an inviolable social institution, is the foundation of
the family and shall be protected by the State. None of our laws should be based on any religious
Nevertheless, it was not meant to be a general law, doctrine, or teaching; otherwise, the
prohibition on divorce as pointed out during the separation of Church and State will be violated. The
1986 Constitutional Commission deliberations. Roman Catholic Church can neither impose its
beliefs and convictions on the State and the rest of
The liberal interpretation of Paragraph 2 of Article the citizenry nor can it demand that the nation
26 does not encourage Filipinos to marry foreigners, follow its beliefs, even if it sincerely believes that
opening the flooodgate to the indiscriminate they are good for the country.
practice of Filipinos marrying foreign nationals or
initiating divorce proceedings against their alien The declared State policy that marriage, as an
spouses. inviolable social institution, is the foundation of the
family and shall be protected by the State, should not
Malipay daw ang mga katkat ani, pero ana SC be read in total isolation but must be harmonized
speculative ra daw ni kay walai factual basis gi with other constitutional provisions.
present. Lol so g lang mag tambay sa TGI or sa
Starbucks. Aside from strengthening the solidarity of the
Filipino family, the State is equally mandated to
The court adheres to the presumption of good faith actively promote its total development. It is also
in this jurisdiction. Under the rules on evidence, it obligated to defend, among others, the right of
is disputably presumed (i.e., satisfactory if children to special protection from all forms of
uncontradicted and overcome by other evidence) neglect, abuse, cruelty, exploitation, and other
that a person is innocent of crime or wrong, that a conditions prejudicial to their development.
person intends the ordinary consequences of his
voluntary acts, that a person takes ordinary care of It is recognized that not all marriages are made in
his concerns, that acquiescence resulted from a heaven and that imperfect humans more often than
belief that the thing acquiesced in was conformable not create imperfect unions. Living in a flawed
to the law and fact, that a man and woman world, the unfortunate reality for some is that the
deporting themselves as husband and wife have attainment of the individual's full human potential
entered into a lawful contract of marriage, and that and self-fulfillment is not found and achieved in the
the law has been obeyed. context of a marriage. Thus, it is hypocritical to
safeguard the quantity of existing marriages and, at
It is whimsical to easily attribute any illegal, the same time, brush aside the truth that some of
irregular or immoral conduct on the part of a them are of rotten quality.
Filipino just because he or she opted to marry a
foreigner instead of a fellow Filipino. It is presumed
that interracial unions are entered into out of
genuine love and affection, rather than prompted

Estanuts by BEANIZA|CADELEÑA|ESTAVILLA|MELENDEZ|SABUSAY UNIVERSITY OF SAN CARLOS

Read the Full Text
CONFLICT OF LAWS (2020) CASE DIGEST ATTY. WALDEMAR GRAVADOR
EH401

Silverio vs. Republic Whether or not petitioner is entitled to the

GR No. 174689, October 19, 2007 relief asked for.

FACTS: RULING:

Petitioner Rommel Jacinto Dantes Silverio filed a No.

petition for the change of his first name and sex in
his birth certificate in the Regional Trial Court of A PERSON'S FIRST NAME CANNOT BE CHANGED ON
Manila and impleaded the civil registrar of Manila THE GROUND OF SEX REASSIGNMENT
as respondent. Petitioner alleged in his petition
that he was born in the City of Manila to the The Court of Appeals rendered a decision in favor
spouses Melecio Petines Silverio and Anita Aquino of the Republic. It ruled that the trial court's
Dantes on April 4, 1962. His name was registered decision lacked legal basis. There is no law allowing
as "Rommel Jacinto Dantes Silverio" in his the change of either name or sex in the certificate
certificate of live birth (birth certificate). His sex of birth on the ground of sex reassignment through
was registered as "male." surgery. Petitioner essentially claims that the
change of his name and sex in his birth certificate is
He further alleged that he is a male transsexual, allowed under Articles 407 to 413 of the Civil Code,
that is, "anatomically male but feels, thinks and acts Rules 103 and 108 of the Rules of Court and RA
as a female" and that he had always identified 9048. He invoked his sex reassignment as the
himself with girls since childhood. Feeling trapped ground for his petition for change of name and sex.
in a man's body, he consulted several doctors in the Petitioner believes that after having acquired the
United States. He underwent psychological physical features of a female, he became entitled to
examination, hormone treatment and breast the civil registry changes sought. The Court
augmentation. His attempts to transform himself to disagree.
a "woman" culminated when he underwent sex
reassignment surgery in Bangkok, Thailand. ART. 376. No person can change his name or
surname without judicial authority.
From then on, petitioner lived as a female and was
in fact engaged to be married. He then sought to This Civil Code provision was amended by RA 9048
have his name in his birth certificate changed from (Clerical Error Law). In particular, Section 1 of RA
"Rommel Jacinto" to "Mely," and his sex from 9048. In sum, the remedy and the proceedings
"male" to "female." During trial, petitioner testified regulating change of first name are primarily
for himself. He also presented as witnesses his administrative in nature, not judicial. RA 9048
American fiancé, Richard and P. Edel Dr. Reysio- likewise provides the grounds for which change of
Cruz, Jr., the plastic and reconstruction surgeon in first name may be allowed:
the Philippines who examined and issued him a
medical certificate attesting that petitioner had in SECTION 4. Grounds for Change of First Name or
fact undergone the sex reassignment surgery. Nickname. — The petition for change of first name
or nickname may be allowed in any of the following
The trial court rendered a decision in favor of cases:
petitioner. The court’s pronouncement as such is (1) The petitioner finds the first name or nickname
that the petitioner filed the present petition not to to be ridiculous, tainted with dishonor or extremely
evade any law or judgment or any infraction difficult to write or pronounce;
thereof or for any unlawful motive but solely for
the purpose of making his birth records compatible (2) The new first name or nickname has been
with his present sex. The Republic of the habitually and continuously used by the petitioner
Philippines (Republic), thru the OSG, filed a and he has been publicly known by that first name or
petition for certiorari in the Court of Appeals. It nickname in the community; or
alleged that there is no law allowing the change of (3) The change will avoid confusion.
entries in the birth certificate by reason of sex
alteration. RA 9048 does not sanction a change of first name
on the ground of sex reassignment. Before a person
ISSUE: can legally change his given name, he must present
proper or reasonable cause or any compelling

Estanuts by BEANIZA|CADELEÑA|ESTAVILLA|MELENDEZ|SABUSAY UNIVERSITY OF SAN CARLOS

Read the Full Text
CONFLICT OF LAWS (2020) CASE DIGEST ATTY. WALDEMAR GRAVADOR
EH401

reason justifying such change. In addition, he must determination of a person's sex made at the time of
show that he will be prejudiced by the use of his his or her birth, if not attended by error, is
true and official name. In this case, he failed to immutable. For these reasons, while petitioner may
show, or even allege, any prejudice that he might have succeeded in altering his body and
suffer as a result of using his true and official name. appearance through the intervention of modern
The petition in the trial court in so far as it prayed surgery, no law authorizes the change of entry as to
for the change of petitioner's first name was not sex in the civil registry for that reason. Thus, there
within that court's primary jurisdiction as the is no legal basis for his petition for the correction
petition should have been filed with the local civil or change of the entries in his birth certificate.
registrar concerned, assuming it could be legally
done. It was an improper remedy because the NEITHER MAY ENTRIES IN THE BIRTH
proper remedy was administrative under RA 9048. CERTIFICATE AS TO FIRST NAME OR SEX BE
CHANGED ON THE GROUND OF EQUITY
NO LAW ALLOWS THE CHANGE OF ENTRY IN THE The changes sought by petitioner will have serious
BIRTH CERTIFICATE AS TO SEX ON THE GROUND and wide-ranging legal and public policy
OF SEX REASSIGNMENT consequences. First, even the trial court itself
found that the petition was but petitioner's first
The determination of a person's sex appearing in step towards his eventual marriage to his male
his birth certificate is a legal issue and the court Fiancé. However, marriage, one of the most sacred
must look to the statutes. The correction or change social institutions, is a special contract of
of such matters can now be made through permanent union between a man and a woman.
administrative proceedings and without the need One of its essential requisites is the legal capacity
for a judicial order. In effect, RA 9048 removed of the contracting parties who must be a male and
from the ambit of Rule 108 of the Rules of Court the a female. Such will substantially reconfigure and
correction of such errors. Rule 108 now applies greatly alter the laws on marriage and family
only to substantial changes and corrections in relations. It is true that Article 9 of the Civil Code
entries in the civil register. Under RA 9048, a mandates that "[n]o judge or court shall decline to
correction in the civil registry involving the change render judgment by reason of the silence, obscurity
of sex is not a mere clerical or typographical error. or insufficiency of the law." However, it is not a
It is a substantial change for which the applicable license for courts to engage in judicial legislation.
procedure is Rule 108 of the Rules of Court. The The duty of the courts is to apply or interpret the
entries envisaged in Article 412 of the Civil Code law, not to make or amend it.
and correctable under Rule 108 of the Rules of
Court are those provided in Articles 407 and 408 of
the Civil Code.

The acts, events or factual errors contemplated

under Article 407 of the Civil Code include even
those that occur after birth. However, no
reasonable interpretation of the Article 407 of the
Civil Code can justify the conclusion that it covers
the correction on the ground of sex reassignment.
A person's sex is an essential factor in marriage and
family relations. It is a part of a person's legal
capacity and civil status. There is no such special
law in the Philippines governing sex reassignment
and its effects. This is fatal to petitioner's cause.

Under the Civil Register Law, a birth certificate is a

historical record of the facts as they existed at the
time of birth. Thus, the sex of a person is
determined at birth, visually done by the birth
attendant (the physician or midwife) by examining
the genitals of the infant. Considering that there is
no law legally recognizing sex reassignment, the

Estanuts by BEANIZA|CADELEÑA|ESTAVILLA|MELENDEZ|SABUSAY UNIVERSITY OF SAN CARLOS

Read the Full Text